Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Next OL lens lab test - Tamron 20mm f/2.8 Di III OSD M1:2
Unsurprisingly the worst of the gang but still decent for a 20mm lens.

FWIW, I've added a sunstars chapter and another bokeh sample to the other two reviews as well.
Chief Editor -

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
It's a fair lens, in the end, as you stated in the price/performance evaluation. I see that you confirm that at ƒ/4 the light spots are "almost" circular, but not as circular as the advertising promised. It's probably the single thing that I was disappointed by.
For what concerns distortion and relatead loss of sharpness, it's a lesser problem if a) you use it on a APS-C camera b) you're doing macro (which means you most likely want blurred things around the subject) and c) you use a partial correction profile. With the last point I mean that you can reduce the distortion correction in post-processing if you are not shooting architecture (c-plan with this lens for me).


Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm Æ’/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm Æ’/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm Æ’/2.8, Samyang 8mm Æ’/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm Æ’/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.
(Trying to) find a bright side: the distortion is still fully a percent (and then some) less than the result posted by EPZ. Smile That aside, the lens still looks better than the old Sigma 20/1.8 or the Canon 20/2.8, though these were old DSLR lenses of course. The new crop of twenties is a lot better, which is also unsurprising.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)